What Can Washington State Do to Make the Feds Move Faster on Oil Train Safety?

Washington
Department of Ecology officials have already admitted that they
wouldn't have enough resources to deal with a surprise tar sands
crude-by-rail spill. Anan Kaewkhammul/Shutterstock

On February 22, the Associated Press published a damning scoop on oil trains: A "previously unreported" study from the federal Department of Transportation predicts 15 oil train derailments in 2015 and an average of 10 annual derailments in this country over the next 20 years. The analysis also notes that a serious accident in a densely populated area could kill more than 200 people.

Preventing a spill in a densely populated area is exactly what protesters who showed up for last week's demonstration
against oil trains in Seattle are worried about. But Washington State
rules can't preempt federal ones, so on top of what's going on at the
local level, it's up to the federal government to demand new safety
standards for the industry. There's a lot of room for improvement,
according to a Center for Biological Diversity report published last
month. It looked at the consequences of oil train derailments across the
country and criticized the feds for not moving fast enough.

Still, there's a lot individual states can do to put pressure on the feds to hurry up, the author of that report says. One of the best ways to do so is public disclosure requirements—rules that identify which oil trains will be passing through different parts of the state, and when.

"I think disclosure requirements need to be broad, because public
pressure is really important," says Jared Margolis, staff attorney at
the Center for Biological Diversity and author of last month's report.
"People should know where these [trains] are so they can stand up and
tell the government this is not what they want. If the pressure is there
from the state, and the citizens, then we'll see some action."

State legislators in Olympia are currently considering two oil
transportation safety bills, one sponsored by Senator Doug Ericksen
(R-Ferndale) and the other by Representative Jessyn Farrell (D-Seattle).
Ericksen's bill, which only covers oil-by-rail safety, doesn't include
public disclosure rules. Farrell's bill, which covers a wide range of
oil transportation safety issues, does.

All of this comes at a time when recent events have doubly underlined
the need for transparency from the oil industry in the Pacific
Northwest. According to an Oregon Public Broadcasting report published
in early February, it took two months for Washington State officials to
figure out that the oil industry had already started moving increased tar sands crude on long trains throughout the state.

Washington's own Department of Ecology has already admitted
that it doesn't have enough resources to address a surprise tar sands
spill. Nor does it help that tar sands crude poses an especially
destructive threat to aquatic ecosystems, and a major spill near the
Columbia River could mean devastation for struggling salmon and
steelhead populations unable to breed in toxic muck..... more here